The Central government, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), and Patanjali Ayurved were served notice by the Delhi High Court on Friday over a petition that claimed that Patanjali’s dental care product “Divya Dant Manjan” had been mislabeled as vegetarian. The product is falsely branded with a “green dot,” which indicates that it is vegetarian, even though it contains fish extract, according to lawyer Yatin Sharma, who filed the petition.
The petition highlights “samudraphen” (sepia officinalis), a fish-based substance, as a crucial component of “Divya Dant Manjan.” The petitioner and his family were upset by this discovery because they strictly adhere to vegetarianism as a result of their religious convictions. They were duped by the green dot into eating a product they thought was vegetarian, going against their dietary rules and religious beliefs.
The petitioner claims that the Drugs and Cosmetics Act’s definition of “misbranding” is met by this mislabeling. The “Divya Dant Manjan” package prominently features a green dot, which is normally reserved for food and cosmetic items that are vegetarian, despite the fact that the law does not require labeling pharmaceuticals as vegetarian or non-vegetarian. Even when elements derived from fish are present, using the green dot violates consumer trust and labeling rules.
Concerns over the absence of supervision and proper action by authorities in resolving this issue are also raised in the petition. It states that more action should be taken by the government and the FSSAI to guarantee that product labels accurately represent the contents of the products, especially where such contents have an impact on dietary habits and religious beliefs.
Respondents in the case, Patanjali Ayurved, Divya Pharmacy, and yoga instructor Ramdev, are accused of deceiving customers by mislabeling the product as vegetarian on the package and the business’s website. The petitioner stresses that people’s religious convictions must be honored and that labeling must be transparent to avoid people who abstain from eating non-vegetarian items unintentionally.
In November, the Delhi High Court will take up the case once more. Up until that point, Patanjali and the FSSAI have been asked to respond by the court. The case’s verdict may have wider ramifications for product labeling, particularly in situations when misbranding may result in the infringement of consumers’ rights and religious beliefs.
SOURCE :
HEALTH WORLD
